Simultaneously the protest of the search process and Fernandes herself seemed to merge with another and equally powerful protest, a movement which had been building at the University for a few years: to bring full accessibility to the University. Not all the faculty, administration, and very few (one or two) of the Campus Security know American Sign Language. Students have been injured, traumatized, and in one publicized instance killed because of this. Also there has been much research demonstrating that students learn better in a barrier-free environment. Opponents claim Deaf people simply want to retreat into their own world; advocates say the time of higher education should be as free of negative pressure as possible if we want the individual to develop into the most productive citizen possible. Since the President-Select, Jane Fernandes, has stalled in responding to these concerns, labelled under the group heading "Audism," for the last three to four years as Provost, pressure was already at an all-time high. The conjunction of these two issues has led to a huge ballooning of support for the protest in the community in ALL its aspects, from those who use ASL to those who do not.
She originally had quite an amount of support but this eroded quickly as her responses to the protest, including votes of no confidence by the faculty, have grown colder and more authoritarian, to the point of threatening the University's Board of Trustees to obtain support. 135 protestors were arrested. 1,000 protested at the University gates. 4,000 marched on the Capitol. Bulldozers mowed down students although luckily injury was light. It has been a long, strange fight. And now Jane Fernandes has been fired by the Board of Trustees. (See video with responses here.) But it's not over yet. We have at this point simply identified the current face of the problem and removed it.
Were our demands the right demands, as Erfo asks? What went wrong with the appointments of Jordan and Fernandes? How do we avoid these problems in the future? Are reprisals occurring amongst the faculty, as reports of firings spread like wildfire? What criteria do we need in place to ascertain that the leadership of Gallaudet remains uncorrupted and true to the ideals of research and academia? And Deaf academia in particular? What lessons did we learn? Where can we improve? The Audism mandates are, I feel, going to be a big part of this.
Right now, Gallaudet is still a University without a President. And without real leadership I fear that the "healing" people call for cannot happen.
Why did this protest happen now? I argue blogs are a huge reason.
Media Control-and breakthrough
For the last ten years Deaf people have been conspicuously absent from the media. Few Deaf people on TV, in movies, except for Sesame Street (Linda Bove was the first person I saw using American Sign Language.) Deaf Mosaic ended quite a while ago. The Media department at Gallaudet has been closed, and I'm reliably informed Gallaudet has published none of its own books on Deaf research in many years. (At the time of this writing you don't seem to be able to order anything from the Gallaudet bookstore, although the University has its own publishing department.) What this means is that the Deaf community has been closed off, in America, from the mainstream. (Recently Deaf theatre programs and actors have been breaking through, but the government has cut much of those funds. This kind of "closing off" typical of a "gatekeeper" mentality, and indeed over the summer the University put out stringent new rules about the expression of free speech.
Yet in the last year thanks to blogging and to the proliferation of youtube, blip.tv and all their variants, Deaf people have begun to open the door again. Not only do people like Ridor, Elisa, and MishkaZena shine a light on the corrupt workings of "gatekeeper" administrations by reporting on the ground, we also have analysts like myself, Sandman, the folks at the ASL Community Journal, and writers at DeafDC have all turned into political pundits. There's dozens now, many of them great, too many now for even me to keep up! "Channels" such as DeafRead have brought all these disparate groups together. And hundreds of other voices have come up-I call them the "peanut gallery." An entire constellation of people have joined together into a living and breathing extension of a community. I'm not sure there's been anything like this in the world's history. It's not just blogging and signcasting. We speak to each other on our televisions without even thinking. Our blackberries and sidekicks get free maps to the world and medical dictionaries and anything else we like. Deaf people found a world of our own: the internet. And we've moved in.
At the time of Deaf Way II some, but not all, of this existed. Now it's commonplace. People check deafread.com continually for the latest news, and while lately the focus has been Gallaudet, the deaf blogosphere is tackling every issue under the sun.
Jane Fernandes said the Deaf community is undergoing revolution. She commented she thought it had to do with herself and whether she was "deaf enough." This is a simplistic and sad view. It is accepted because people push a pathology of Deaf people as ungrateful and talentless. It is true that our Media revolution-the Deaf Blogging Revolution-has a lot in common with the Gallaudet protests in '88. The point of both these revolutions is for us to throw off the "gatekeepers" keeping our community down: we are trying to grow, and they are keeping us from water. It is NOT to build some fantasy-Oz where Deaf people live forever... as if I would leave New York, anyway.
It also symbolizes the American Deaf community's journey to adulthood-into what Dr. Paddy Ladd calls "Deafhood." Remember all of us united thanks to this Media revolution. Deaf, hearing, hard of hearing, CI user, all tribes came together into one Deaf nation, our differences at least partially erased by the Internet. 135 arrested. 9 hunger strikers. 1000 protesting at the University gates. 4000 protesting on the lawn of the Capitol. And Deaf people's blogs were there leading and reporting on everything. No middlemen. No gatekeepers. Just us, dealing with the world on our own terms. Nobody speaking for us.
It's called democracy. And it's kind of sweet.
Gallaudet retained Dickstein Shapiro , a Washington-based law and lobbying firm, to "educate" lawmakers about the situation on campus and lobby on appropriations issues.
"We want to make sure that people on the Hill understand the reality of what's happening on campus," said Amy Weiss of Point Blank Public Affairs , who was hired by the university to help with public relations during the crisis.
As a small girl in Massachusetts, she took piano lessons for the discipline and structure, even though she couldn’t hear the music. As an undergraduate at Trinity College in Hartford, Conn., without interpreters or support services, she became fluent in French. In graduate school at the University of Iowa, she embraced her identity as a deaf person; after learning American Sign Language, she won the Miss Deaf Iowa title, promising to bridge the gulf between the deaf and hearing worlds. Working with deaf children in Hawaii, she built a glowing reputation as she fought state officials who tended to view the deaf as mentally disadvantaged.
“I was educated in how to behave like a hearing person, and I did it pretty well,” she said. “But psychologically and socially, it took a toll. Like denying a fundamental part of who I am.”
After meeting other deaf people and learning sign language, her deafness ceased to be a source of embarrassment. The word she uses to describe the person she became is “whole.”
“Rather than try everything to cover up being deaf or avoid being caught as deaf, I was proud to be deaf and wanted everyone to know it,” she said.
Is it possible to ask the protest lawyers to obtain emergency injuctions against the university to prevent any representative of the university from approaching protesters without either
- qualifications in ASL or
- an interpreter present with them?
This is a health and safely emergency, students have been injured, and there is a strong history of students being killed and injured by DPS/DPP in situations involving a lack of access to communication in ASL to transmit warnings / engage in discussions / negotiations.
Your lawyer can argue that this injunction is to enforce what Gallaudet Admin should already be doing as a matter of course, to make Gally enforce their own communications guidelines,and that there are serious concerns over future interaction between DPS / DPP without ASL skills and the students.
At the least, you could seek injunctions against the named individuals above.
Also - on dealing with IKJ's PR firm = From the Washington Post, an extract:But while Gallaudet officials may not have been able to gettheir message across to the students that she's the best candidate for the job, they have made sure that at least one constituency is getting their side of the story: Congress.
Gallaudet retained Dickstein Shapiro, a Washington-based law and lobbying firm, to "educate" lawmakers about the situation on campus and lobby on appropriations issues.
A peaceful group with nothing better to do might like to get together and go down to their offices and do a peaceful sit-in protest. Take turns holding signs outside their offices every day. We've learned that outside companies hate it when the people they're slagging off suddenly turn up at their offices.
If Shapiro resign their brief, it will get around Washington fast, and isolate JKF and IKJ even more.
i read about the situation at gallaudet... (2+ / 0-)
just last week. i hadn't heard about it until i read a diary here. it just so happens that my best friend lives and works in the dc area. we email each other everyday and talk about everything. she mentioned that the students were on strike at gallaudet and she was distressed that they were doing so. she had only seen the newspaper and tv accounts. i told her about the diary i had read and about articles i read after googling. i sent her the links and told her not to believe everything she reads in the papers. she was totally unaware of the students' side of the story (as well as quite a few of the instructors and alumni). she now sees the story in a whole new light.
isn't it sickening when the truth can't be told and discussed? instead, they just pr eveything to death. all surface, no substance.
by nonnie9999 on Wed Oct 25, 2006 at 08:36:10 PM PDT
Example: Fernandes has repeatedly said she wants to "lead" Deaf people. (Note she doesn't say "teach" Deaf people. That might end up with them speaking for themselves. Can't have that.) She has also said she is the only one who can lead Gallaudet. What does this imply? This implies Deaf people are "special," need a special "leader," are unable to think for or speak for themselves, or even learn. To hearing people who listen to Fernandes, this kind of message reinforces the image of Deaf people as needing "help," "guidance," and "rehabilitation." To the Deaf community, it reinforces the image that we cannot lead ourselves, that the last 30 years or so of improvements in education and technology have groomed no leaders.
Example 2: Bobby Cox and others ask why it is culturally Deaf, ASL using people who seem to be most strongly against Fernandes. While there is a mix of groups in the protest, it is true that people from the Deaf community are in the lead. The focus of Cox's comment discussion was on the Deaf part of that phrase. Commentors ignored the "community" part. Yet this is important, and understanding how this works with other groups will help us understand how it works with ours. What is a community? A group of people who share information. Of course the Deaf community is most strongly against her selection as President: they have ten years of information to share. New students, who aren't in the loop yet, aren't going to know this for a while.
October 22, 2006
MEMORANDUM
TO: Members of the Campus Community
FR: I. King Jordan
RE: Middle States Commission on Higher Education
As most of you know, we submitted our five-year Periodic Review Report (PRR) to the Middle States Association (MSA) on June first. This Report was developed by a 14-member committee of faculty, staff, students, and administrators. A draft of the report was reviewed by the Faculty Senate, which provided feedback that was incorporated into the report and a draft was made available to the campus community for review and feedback as well. The Middle States Commission on Higher Education is scheduled to act on our PRR in November and make a decision about reaffirmation of the University’s accreditation.
Last week, the vice president of the Commission contacted me and informed me that the Commission is concerned about the protest that led to closure of the University for three days and that there is concern about how this affects compliance with accreditation standards.
I have been asked to submit a response to MSA’s concern in early November so that the Commission can incorporate it into their deliberations. I will share my response with the campus community.
I know you are aware of how important MSA accreditation is to the University and to our graduates as they seek employment and further education. I will keep you informed of any further communication and action by MSA.
Some people said that they disagreed with the idea of civil disobedience and that we should open a dialogue with Fernandes, Jordan and all that silly putzes. I understand their views but they are wrong. Know why? We already did. I used to volunteer for the SBG’s Deaf Issues Department and I had been observing different departments within the SBG who made a lot of efforts to recommend many things that can enhance Gallaudet’s place in the society.Look at this e-mail from Jordan as recently as February 2006, months before the protest began, where he tries to backpedal:
The recommendations has been consistently *ignored*. Sending the letters to them has been unanswered. Bringing up the issues in meetings with ehse administrators always resulted in things like, “Oh, that is good idea. I’ll bring it up with others.”
“The Provost and I knew that the OMB assessment was taking place over the past year. But when we inquired about Gallaudet’s participation in the process we were told it was primarily about the ED’s oversight responsibilities, and that we were not invited to participate in meetings, help interpret data, or even allowed to comment on preliminary findings. In other words, we had no direct involvement in the OMB assessment.
“Fortunately, the PART rating had no negative impact on Gallaudet’s appropriation request, but it could have a temporary effect on the University’s image. That is why it is important for every member of the campus community to understand the true purpose of the OMB report, which is to evaluate the ED’s oversight responsibilities relative to Gallaudet’s federally funded programs. Gallaudet has been serving people who are deaf and hard of hearing for nearly 150 years and our thousands of successful alumni are proof that, regardless of what this report says, ours is an extraordinarily effective University.
NOT PERFORMING
Ineffective
Programs receiving this rating are not using your tax dollars effectively. Ineffective programs have been unable to achieve results due to a lack of clarity regarding the program's purpose or goals, poor management, or some other significant weakness.
* Gallaudet failed to meet its goals or showed declining performance in key areas, including the number of students who stay in school, graduate, and either pursue graduate degrees or find jobs upon graduation. For example, Gallaudet graduates who find employment commensurate with their education declined from 90% in 2001 to 69% in 2005.
* The Department of Education lacks a schedule and mechanism for monitoring federally funded programs at Gallaudet. The Department does not conduct site visits on a regular basis to Gallaudet, document its use of funds, assess program data quality, or the University's compliance with its governing legislation.
* The Department of Education has not evaluated the federally funded programs at Gallaudet to ensure that they are operating effectively, addressing the needs of their service population, addressing their statutory purpose, and achieving results.
If a group of gay people protested that a gay leader was doing terribly, and the leader said, "They think I'm not gay enough," what would happen?
If a group of black people protested that a black leader was going terribly, and the leader said, "They think I'm not black enough," what would happen?
This is what happens when Deaf people protest that a Deaf leader is doing terribly, and the leader says, "They think I'm not Deaf enough."
Deafhood is not, however, a 'static' medical condition like 'deafness.' Instead, it represents a process - the struggle by each Deaf child, Deaf family and Deaf adult to explain to themselves and each other their own existence in the world. In sharing their lives with each other as a community, and enacting those explanations rather than writing books about them, Deaf people are engaged in a daily praxis, a continuing internal and external dialogue. (p.3, "Understanding Deaf Culture" by Ladd)
When the faculty were informed Fernandes was ready, they all got together. MJ Bienvenu, a faculty member, told Fernandes that the purpose of the meeting was to let her know that 82% of the faculty wants her to resign and what she would do with this lack of support. Fernandes answered that she would not resign. The faculty asked her why. Fernandes said, “I’m the only one who can lead the university.”
Bienvenu was blunt with her, telling her that she was arrogant for saying that. Fernandes said that she will stay, that she has support. The faculty asked, without 82% of the support of the faculty, what can Fernandes do as a leader? Fernandes told them that she had a plan and that she wouldn’t tell them what the plan was because she’s currently focused on current issues that are popping up and adjusting the plan as she goes. The faculty asked her, what if Gallaudet falls apart and closes before she can implement the plan? Fernandes said that she would bring Gallaudet back.
" . . . I'm not really thinking of resigning, no. But I'm trying to think of how . . . to work from now until January to be in a position to be where I can be effective."This seems connected. What will happen in January? How will Fernandes be more effective in January? Is this part of her SECRET PLAN? Why is it so important her plan remain secret? Why can't she talk about it to faculty, to her TEAM, in order to convince them they should support her? It must be something that would shock and anger the entire faculty-or galvanize the protest. It also contradicts much of what she says in her own job application:
I lead “from behind and within” while focusing intently on Gallaudet’s mission and the goals and actions we must take to fulfill it. I identify individuals who can successfully do the needed work and I put my energy into cultivating their talents. The fulfillment of the University’s mission and the achievement of equitable outcomes for all students are my ultimate objectives. Finding the right people to do the work is my talent. I would characterize my style of leadership as highly participatory and focused.
My colleagues, work with Dr. Jane Fernandes in a peaceful, positive, productive non-sabotaging manner. Think of Deaf children throughout the world. Turning against one of our own is not going to help us. She is one of us. Whether you deny it or not, the days of using the white deaf yardstick are long gone. It has been said that Gallaudet has serious issues with audism and racism. That is true. Few would deny it. To change this we must work together. And the truth is, there is no one more willing and ready to work with you on these crucial problems than Dr. Jane Fernandes and I.
We will benefit by working with all toward the common good of Gallaudet.
Dr. Norman:
I would like to hear your perspective on why you believe the protestors are behaving as you claim. You state protestors have been heard. Protestors claim their requests are denied. Before the lockdown at Gallaudet, the Administration refused to listen to any of the SBG's requests. You seem to feel the perspective is without value, because you do not agree with it. Why, then, would they do this? I should like to hear your rationale. Do you really believe all these people are protesting out of stubborn childishness? Please back up your words with documentary proof.
I appreciate your comments, and would like to see an end to this stalemate, but to say that the protestors should accept you do not agree with them, is also to say you must accept that they do not agree with you. 82% of the faculty and the Clerc Center do not agree with you. They have had ten years of experience working with Ms. Fernandes, and she is not a stranger who should simply be given a chance, as you insinuate. Nobody has responded to concerns about her track record, when they are raised: they resort to the same message you did, a confused garble about Deaf community and culture which I feel does more to alienate us from the rest of the world than it does to bring us together. The fact is plenty of concerns and frustrations about Fernandes have been raised which have nothing to do with her status as a deaf or Deaf person. In fact there are people from every tribe in the Deaf nation among the protestors: hearing people, deaf people, Deaf people, people with implants, people without, people learning ASL, interpreters, etc. etc. This is not a protest from one tiny bit of the Deaf community, although certain specific actions might be.
And on the other hand - your comments seem to contradict Fernandes' own vision. She envisions a University with "communication diversity." This seems to me like Babel Tower. Your recommendation is that protestors focus on "promoting ASL for all Deaf children throughout this nation and sign language for all Deaf children throughout the world;" shouldn't they begin at home? Isn't Gallaudet to be the example for the nation?
I agree with you that the way forward must be together. As a team. There must be more listening and responding on both sides. As it is one criticism of the administration is its adherence to a party line instead of an honest discourse. Neither their message or meaning has changed. This is the source of much frustration in the community by the gates.
Also, I understand your list of things which you feel the Deaf community should focus on. We have united because of this particular issue. I believe our unity will continue after this issue is dealt with. I encourage you to reconsider. The events at Gallaudet are powerful. They will not be resolved by the divisive tactics of this administration.
Yours,
Joseph Santini, M.Sc., Deaf Studies
When a fiduciary duty is imposed, equity requires a stricter standard of behaviour than the comparable tortious duty of care at common law. It is said the fiduciary has a duty not to be in a situation where personal interests and fiduciary duty conflict, a duty not to be in a situation where their fiduciary duty conflicts with another fiduciary duty, and a duty not to profit from their fiduciary position without express knowledge and consent. A fiduciary cannot have a conflict of interest. It has been said that fiduciaries must conduct themselves "at a level higher than that trodden by the crowd."
" . . . I'm not really thinking of resigning, no. But I'm trying to think of how . . . to work from now until January to be in a position to be where I can be effective."
When we left off, the Tent City of Gallaudet had closed, and emotions were confused around the country. But the Administration, despite being on vacation, had continued the work of trying to convince the world the protest was about nothing. Over the summer the National Association of the Deaf planned a conference: at this conference, faculty and staff from Gallaudet were forced to go through training in representing the administration, ordered to speak the opinions of their overseers, and even had to distribute a DVD listing Jane Fernandes' accomplishments. Deaf Bloggers went to NAD to counter the propoganda. It turned into a political, verbal war - the kind that happen between activists that feel strongly about issues. This war continued over the summer, as people all over the country began talking about audism and deafhood. Moreover, activism seemed to disappear over the summer, although the administration continued working; blogger RidorLive went so far as to say:
FSSA Is Dead: As of now, I regret to let you know that the FSSA is dead or in state of hibernation. They seemed unable to organize anything at this point. Even with the Board Retreat at Hyatt-Dulles in Herndon, Virginia — I was told that nobody showed up. It is typical of I. King Jordan to organize things like this during the summertimes to keep the Board from interacting with the staff, faculty and students at all.Returning to the campus, students discovered that new rules about freedom of speech and expression had been issued which seemed to specifically ban such types of protest as had been going on in May (see first part.) These rules were so strict that a teacher from Kent State wrote in to encourage I. King Jordan to relieve the pressure (to the person who commented on my last blog that "this is like Kent State" - I had no idea about this at the time!) These new rules were objected to by the Gallaudet University Faculty, Student, Staff and Alumni Association, with one group of teachers saying:It is my hope that the students will be able to instigate this in the fall semester and do something about the Axis of Evil. It is necessary to improve Gallaudet with a clean slate. With them on the board, Gallaudet is going down and down and down.
Faculty resistance to the “Guidelines” stemmed from the perception that the rules are so numerous, specific, and complicated as to make it virtually impossible to obtain permission to demonstrate or post signs. Furthermore, the rules are heavy-handed, rigid, and created without participation of the Faculty. Finally, the rules exacerbate the current climate of fear on campus.
Back at the University, students immediately demonstrated against Audism, amid what seemed like a heightened number of attacks on Deaf people nationwide. While these attacks had nothing to do with the Gallaudet situation, they exacerbated a feeling of fear and a need for coalition.
On the 29th of August the Gallaudet Student Body Government met again to discuss the situation at Elstad Auditiorium on campus. Simultaneously many faculty wrote letters to indicate their dissent and desire to reopen the search process for a new President; interviews began with those formerly in the running. Faculty seemed to want to join together, but were confused about their ability to even meet with each other under the new guidelines:
The declaration that we do not have effective administrative leadership on campus was met with applause. We have no control over what the Board hears about this meeting because we have no true, meaningful opportunity for dialogue.
Two professors pointed out that everyone attending the meeting could be fired for insubordination because Faculty Governance had not applied for a permit to meet and express opinions, as currently required by the President’s 28 June “Guidelines” memo.
On the 20th of September, the Gallaudet Student Body Government issued a vote of No Confidence in Fernandes. Some student leaders emerged; most had been too afraid to come forward in the past. These student leaders were: Ryan Commerson, Tara Holcomb, LaToya Plummer, Chris Corrigan, Delia Lozano-Martinez and Leah Katz-Hernandez.
On the 25th of September, a small group of Administration supporters issued a letter indicating they felt this was a battle between "purebloods" and "mudbloods" on campus. This seemed to continue the divisive work of the University President, who was continually saying "They think I'm not Deaf enough," pounding a meme home until it hurt. What does this theme even mean? Is it true? Who knows - that particular group never put forth definitions of any of these terms, but allowed people's imaginations to work, and much like the effects similar divisive comments have in Women's and African-American and Gay and Lesbian movements, (You're not gay enough/black enough/feminist enough) imagination can divide. This comparison fractured the community further and as Allison Kaftan has stated on her blog:
So now on top of discrimination and ignorance, we’ve just had another huge battle handed to us, courtesy of Dr. Jordan, Mercy Coogan, Dr. Fernandes, NBC, ABC, FOX, NPR, the Washington Post, CNN, and a whole bunch of other entities that have done us the favor of disseminating that wonderful phrase.
That battle will last us for years: the perception that there is a standard against which people can measure to find out whether they’re deaf enough. Decades of cultural work will have to be done.
Later, it was revealed by Ridorlive.com that one member of the Administration, Mercy Coogan, had been posting supportive articles about the administration under the nom de plume Aunt Sophie. The propaganda barrage was immense, and the climate of fear heavy.
Rumors began to fly about the re-establishment of the Tent City that had draped the campus in May. On October 1st, early in the morning, the Tent City was reestablished on the lawn by a small number of faculty and students who defied the strict rules on "freedom of expression." A few hours later, staff at the University were ordered to put fertilizer on the grounds. Allegations were made but never proven that this was an attempt to nip the protest in the bud, so to speak. Protestors pointed out that it was unusual to spread fertilizer on Monday morning when the campus had just reopened. Administration supporters pointed out it was important to keep Kendal Green, green. It was equally possible that a third party or uninterested student who simply wanted to make trouble had made the call; at this point blood seemed hot on both sides, so the issue was used as a two-edged sword. The Tent City was re-convened the next day. Protest leaders were informed that their City was illegal:
After the rally, SBG leaders met with Carl Pramuk and the SBG advisor. SBG leaders were told that if tent city is still up after 11:00 pm this evening, the contract between SBG and the Business Office would be torn up and Tent City would be banned the rest of this week.
Members of the Board of Trustees are the stewards of our university. Your discussions during this first week of October will make history at Gallaudet University and do much to determine its future path and the well being of its community. The Gallaudet community is looking for your leadership in forging a path towards excellence we can be proud of.This diplomatic letter had no effect. On October 5th the Student Body Government met with the Board of Trustees, which told them nothing could be done and that they were in a stalemate. That Friday night was a deadline the SBG had announced for discussions. At the appointed time students lined up outside of the Gallaudet Conference Center where the President was having a celebration of his work at the University. At 10 PM protestors asked if there was a response. They were told that the Board and President had no time to speak to them that night. In response to these refusals to communicate, students decided to "lockdown" the main academic building at the University, known as HMB, short for Hall Memorial Building. This was a controversial move that caused furor all over the country.
We ask that you reconsider your position and re-engage the community as you promised during those days in May.
The next day students awoke to find Campus Security, not talking to them, but simply making a raid:
At 8 a.m. this morning, as students were sleeping in the SBG office, on the first floor of the already locked down HMB, officers from the Department of Public Safety (DPS) stormed in. Students were terrified, people were running everywhere, screaming. DPS started pushing and hitting students and threatening to spray mace. Some people were assaulted. Students who had been peacefully asleep, and abruptly awoken, were not resisting. We did nothing. The attack from DPS came totally unprovoked.Indeed, these campus officers could NOT speak to the students: there's a very short list of people in that organization who know any sign language whatsoever. Supportive tent cities began to pop up all over the world. Bomb threats were called in and this was blamed on students by the Administration, although why students would want to evacuate the building they were occupying was never explained. The incident raised emotions all over the country - indeed the world, as parents, faculty, and alumni sent in letters to the Administration appealing for a solution. The Administration encouraged the University to restore trust. Faculty were offered five minutes to speak to the Board of Trustees.
Once DPS officers left and we were able to collect ourselves together and survey the damage, we found several students had been hurt. We had been physically assaulted by the Gallaudet University Department of Public Safety. I cannot explain the state of mind we are in at this moment. We are shocked, extremely upset, and hurt bodily and emotionally.
The students’ single resolution is reasonable. The student leaders agree to cease lockdown of the Hall Memorial Building if the President agrees to provide 24/7 protest safe zones and to agree to continue the negotiation process to address other issues. While there seems to be a stated University goal towards action to open the classroom building, to place a high value on education, and to respect the educational needs of students both in the protest and those who are not, President Jordan’s actions make it clear this is not his intention. Punishing the students seems to take precedence.
There's a bright light so they can't see the interpreters.Read the liveblog of the arrests here!
They blinding the students sitting
It's a spotlight (mz) (from a liveblogger during the protest
I still feel there was a great chance Fernandes could have nipped this in the bud back in May. People were not so convinced then. Now several months later, with injuries on both sides, both sides are running on pride and spit.That was clipped for space, but you can check out the whole discussion on DailyKos. We were on the TOP TEN diary list for several hours! I also want to post pictures and more pictures! Two great photographers. Also as of 8pm last night the latest news from protestors on the ground after letters from the administration last night. And more and more student governments and Deaf Studies depts. at colleges and universities around the country are showing support. However criticism still mounts that the University was shut down; opponents say that this has made Gallaudet students little more than thugs, despite the University's repeated refusal to consider or allow shared governance since 2000. Think of the American political problems: we have a system of checks and balances, which is currently out of order. As it is faculty and teachers at many - if not all - departments of Gallaudet have submitted votes of no confidence and other concerns.
I wonder. What would happen if this was Harvard and 135 faculty and students were arrested because of protesting concerns about the administration? What would be different?
by joseph rainmound on Sun Oct 15, 2006 at 08:39:02 PM PDT
response:
You know, at Harvard they didn't have to get to that point. They offed Summers' head as fast as the faculty could undermine him. Even after he offered a mea culpa.
by Prime Number on Sun Oct 15, 2006 at 08:56:45 PM PDT
No, I didn’t get the order wrong. This was one of the problems. Freudian slip or not, it made people nervous during the search process for a new President. Fernandes, then the University Provost for six years, was not the popular choice. It was reported that:
...a recent Faculty poll showing that Dr. Fernandes has an acceptability rate among the Faculty of only 36%, while the other two finalists had much higher acceptability rates of 53% (Stern) and 64% (Weiner)
Did you honestly believe that deaf people of color and any reasonable person would agree with your “assertion” that race was NOT an issue when we find a candidate who met the most important profile requirements, has been in possession of an earned doctorate from a respected university for over 20 years and happens to be a person of color and yet is deemed inferior or not a better candidate than a white man who we believe should have been screened out in the very first applicants screening process for the simple reason he did not possess a doctorate degree for a position that absolutely requires one?
When she became Provost in 2000 amid controversy that the University decided to circumvent the usual shared-governance search process involving the faculty in her selection, Fernandes was soon faced with a situation on campus: a growing movement to understand Audism, a form of discrimination against deaf people based on biological or cultural difference. (some of my own thoughts here. The Student Body Government in developed a set of mandates, based on research completed in the 30 years since the Stokoe revolution, about the use of American Sign Language on Campus, and suggested the need for better evaluation systems for faculty and staff on campus to achieve the fully accessible environment promised on the University webpage. This was revolutionary; while Pre-College National Mission Programs had been famous for a fully-accessible ASL environment, where all teachers could sign all the time (none of that funny business about having conversations right over the heads of children, which is not conducive to positive feeling or learning) this is still uncommon in America, where support for the new concepts derived from Stokoe’s research was still slow in growing, though European countries were several years into their implementation.
Students report that Gallaudet campus police and even some Professors cannot sign ASL fluently. The Audism Mandates encouraged the administration to determine the ASL fluency of incoming students and provide education on the job so that their skills could be bettered. The same would be required of students. Notice the emphasis on raising standards for staff AND students – a minimum proficiency level in both languages, and a campus-wide ASL/English mentoring program. This was community-based effort at change at its finest. It came about despite, not because of, the environment at the college, which has never chosen to recognize ASL as the official language of instruction at the University. The benefits are obvious – a barrier-free environment where the student can learn without a support system such as a notetaker or interpreter, where the teacher can be a direct model for the student. Not to mention the increases in safety and health, with a Sign-Language using medical staff and campus police. Some have compared the psychological effects as being similar to the difference for women, going to a women’s college, or gay teenagers at a special school, or prodigies at a school designed to fit their needs. Without these barriers, the students learn more quickly and their education is of higher quality; they can then bring a higher level of skills to the work force – as well as their unique perspective. (I realize this is a lot to take in: this protest has become the nexus of many, many issues.)
An additional concern about Fernandes was Gallaudet's failure at program assessment during her tenure as Provost, raising concerns about Gallaudet's federal funding.
When the Gallaudet Board of Trustees’ selection of Fernandes was announced on May 1st, 2006, there was a public outcry. At first people were bewildered enough to seem in shock; but almost immediately an organized protest formed into a tent city on the campus.
The Tent City has become legendary in the Deaf Community now. You must understand the interest Deaf people around the world have in Gallaudet University. Right now, 1000 Protesters stand at the front gate of the University. Tent Cities have sprung up in Deaf communities and Deaf Studies depts. at Universities around America and the world. This article on Inside Higher Ed. explains the reasons for the intensity of the protest at that time:
There’s no doubt that with the departure of Jordan, Gallaudet will assume a new direction. In the 18 years since Deaf President Now, we’ve shown the world that deaf people are in fact capable of doing anything except hearing. That’s the Catch-22. DPN made it possible for deaf students to go to any college in the United States and be successful. Gallaudet has stayed symbolic, inspiring those who go to Princeton, but not always attracting those same students. We have always been the best deaf university in the world, because competition is so thin. But we’re not satisfied with that. We want the best and brightest students, the ones who now have educational opportunities that were never available before. And that’s why we need a president with all the right qualities, not just someone who shares our deafness.
The Gallaudet University Board of Trustees’ announcement on May 1st of the selection of Dr. Jane K. Fernandes as president-select shook Gallaudet University and the global deaf community. Immediate responses from diverse groups and individuals on and off campus indicated a profound sense of betrayal, disenfranchisement, and powerlessness.The immediate response was: These are just culturally Deaf people with an agenda. The FSSA protestors were accused of vandalism and tensions were indeed very high. The FSSA responded with a statement that their group was diverse, but the meme took, and soon almost all the newspapers called it "a squabble about what it means to be a Deaf person." Fernandes was raised outside of Deaf culture and did not come to it later in life and does not use American Sign Language, but a code called SimCom which was popular late in the 20th Century before SimCom was generally considered to be a confusing failure in education:
Research has shown that Simultaneous Communication (often referred to as "TC" or "Simcom") compromises both English and American Sign Language. The user's native language generally dominates the other. This attempt to use two languages in two different modes simultaneously (like trying to write Chinese and speak English at the same time) presents a mixed and confusing model.
While ASL does have strong ties to the Deaf cultural identity, it is not the sole indicator, and here it obviously has greater importance than the administration is admitting. In the more recent protests in DC, for example, when being arrested, one man turned and shouted to the crowd: “I am doing this for my two children.” Students wanted to see progression in the leadership of the University also. For them, Fernandes, using an outmoded system, represented the past. This is also the reason for the identity-politics meme: one commonly-spread fear is that ASL-using Deaf people do not learn to read or write. (Note: I use ASL.) Also, Fernandes as provost had not responded to the Audism Mandates, which again was part of the fight for improved communication at the University. Many were sure the vote was rigged. Faculty resigned, particularly Celia May Baldwin over the controversy.
After the no-confidence vote by the University Faculty, Fernandes reiterated her commitment to not leaving; she planned to become President. The Gallaudet FSSA affirmed their commitment to the protest; although they negotiated throughout this period with the Board of Trustees, the general consensus is that the BOT did not address their concerns:
And, while we appreciate that the Board of Trustees recognizes the importance of a diversity plan to enhance our multi-cultural community, we are dismayed that they have entrusted the responsibility for facilitating this plan to Dr. Fernandes. Although Dr. Fernandes claims diversity as her strength in leadership, she has demonstrated that she lacks awareness of how her approach thus far has been controlling, non-inclusive, and lacking in transparency and equity. She has not only failed to unite the Gallaudet community, she has divided and severely hurt our community with her identity politics and inequitable diversity strategies.Although there were calls for people to do something about the issue, the stalemate continued until May 31st, 2006 when the University closed. The Tent City closed also: protestors went home, promising to return in the fall, despite some who said they should stay on campus.
